I just had a look at the included LICENSE file in Mephisztoe's Github mirror. Why is Mephisztoe slapping an MIT license on Casey's code, in which Mephisztoe claims copyright ownership of public domain material?

#12562 Casey'a Version Control System 4 weeks ago
Edited by Mārtiņš Možeiko
on July 20, 2017, 4:53 p.m.

Because original code was under public domain. My understanding is that it means you can do literally anything with it. Its equivalent of picking up random wood stick on the street and claiming it is yours.

I see. So, with that understanding, I hereby declare that I also claim copyright of cmirror. That's not all, though. I also claim copyright of all of Sean Barrett's stb libraries, since they are in the public domain as well!

While I'm at it, I also lay claim to the Happy Birthday Song and all of Van Gogh's art that is in the public domain!

Since I have now wedged myself inbetween you and the original works, I am asking anyone who uses them in any way to pay tribute to me, as is declared in my benevolent license that is going to be published soon!

#12565 Casey'a Version Control System 4 weeks ago
Edited by Mārtiņš Možeiko
on July 20, 2017, 5:56 p.m.

Borealis Since I have now wedged myself inbetween you and the original works, I am asking anyone who uses them in any way to pay tribute to me, as is declared in my benevolent license that is going to be published soon!

Nothing prevents you to sell Sqlite or Python source code. Or binaries. Or stb source. Or public domain songs. That's completely legal. Put up an ebay page and sell them.

But you cannot prevent people getting sqlite/python/stb/songs from original source. That's why they are in public domain.

Modifications to a public domain work may be protected by copyright and cannot be used without permission. A famous example used in many copyright classes is the artist who paints an elaborate hat and mustache on the Mona Lisa. Even though anyone is free to copy the image of the Mona Lisa, the modified image (with mustache and hat) is protected under the artist’s copyright.

That entire post of mine was sarcastic and meant to prove a point. I guess that despite the obvious hyperbole it was being taken at face value. I do not intend to claim copyright ownership of the Happy Birthday Song or any of Van Gogh's works that are in the public domain. That would just be silly. I also find it disingenuous to claim copyright ownership of a work that was meant to be free for all to use, without any hindrance.

You bring up a related point. Works that are derived from another work that is in the public domain. That is not the case here, though. Mephisztoe simply uploaded Casey's original work to Github as is and claimed copyright ownership over the code in the included license. It is not a derivative work by any stretch of the imagination.

Anyway, I'm done here. This isn't my battle to fight. I called out what looked like a case of copyfraud, where someone claimed copyright ownership over a work that is in the public domain, without having had any involvement in it or having put any effort into creating a derivative work.

Maybe you can help me, since you seem to have some profound Knowledge about Software licensing - that I do not have (no sarcasm intended!)

Thing is: I am not used to using github. When creating the repo I had to make a license choice and as far as I can tell, the MIT license basically says the same as Casey does with his reference to the public Domain license: Do whatever you like. This is why I Chose the MIT license.

Also I am referencing Caseys work.

What would be the more appropriate way? By no means I intended to Claim any rights on the source.

I do not claim to have any "profound knowledge" regarding software licenses. If you're looking for legal advice, I can't help you.

Anyway, when you had to choose a license for the Github repo, why didn't you just copy and paste Casey's public domain waiver instead of re-licensing the code under different terms? It's right at the top of cmirror's source code. It reads like this:

The authors of this software MAKE NO WARRANTY as to the RELIABILITY,
SUITABILITY, or USABILITY of this software. USE IT AT YOUR OWN RISK.

This is a simple source code control utility. It was initially
written by Casey Muratori but has since grown to include the fine
work of Sean Barrett and Jeff Roberts. It is in the public domain.
Anyone can use it, modify it, roll'n'smoke hardcopies of the source
code, sell it to the terrorists, etc.

But the authors make absolutely no warranty as to the reliability,
suitability, or usability of the software. It works with files -
probably files that are important to you. There might be bad bugs
in here. It could delete them all. It could format your hard drive.
We have no idea. If you lose all your files from using it, we will
point and laugh. Cmirror is not a substitute for making backups.

The MIT license is claimed to be one of the best and most liberal licenses out there, but it's not the same as a public domain license. Here's the license that you chose:

MIT License

Copyright (c) 2017 Mephisztoe

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
copies or substantial portions of the Software.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
SOFTWARE.

I don't have the legal expertise to point out the differences in detail, but I can already see two glaring differences between Casey's public domain license and the MIT license that you chose:

1. You're claiming copyright ownership of cmirror on the third line. "Copyright (c) 2017 Mephisztoe". Whereas Casey's public domain license doesn't have a copyright ownership claim to it. That's a big part of what makes it a public domain license. Claiming copyright ownership matters a big deal, even if you're so benevolent that you abstain from most of your claimed rights. As I mentioned before, claiming copyright ownership of a work that is in the public domain can even be considered copyright fraud.

2. The other big difference is that you're making the use of the source code conditional upon the following requirement: "The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software." With your MIT license, I have to include the license text with your copyright notice with all copies of my software. It's like a viral license intended to show everyone that you own the copyright to the software and what your terms are. With Casey's public domain waiver, the use of the software is not conditional upon anything. No strings attached.

I was not Aware of the fact that choosing a license in github only makes the life as a developer easier by copying the respective licenses' text based on a template. So I edited the license file and copied the original Public Domain license text as used by Casey in the cmirror sourcecode.